hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Amazing. Fred was outstanding on everything, which is about compatible. I would rather balance than anything legendary, thanks.Pick whoever you want and I'll make com comparable to everyone else's scout.
Amazing. Fred was outstanding on everything, which is about compatible. I would rather balance than anything legendary, thanks.Pick whoever you want and I'll make com comparable to everyone else's scout.
@Karl Hungus - I've offered a scout called Ivan Medina. He's neutral which is good. Can I change his name to Roger Hernandez?
You should create Roger Murdoch instead.
What the fuck have I done now. Enlighten me.
Since coaching staff is essentially turned off, all scouts are given the same exact grades so teams don’t have an advantage in scouting. So just pick a coach (most of us pick former players that we liked) and Karl will give him high ratings that match every other scout that we use
They all started with Outstanding ratings but then we just let them develop. I think we let people choose favor tools or whatever too. So there is some variance, but nothing extreme.Since coaching staff is essentially turned off, all scouts are given the same exact grades so teams don’t have an advantage in scouting. So just pick a coach (most of us pick former players that we liked) and Karl will give him high ratings that match every other scout that we use
CHEAT CODESI didn't know scouts develop. That's weird that we let them develop in the first place and don't reset them every year.
But you're saying that in 4 years, Seoul's scout went from all Outstanding to all LEGENDARY? And Douglass Tagg regresses over 26 years?
I didn't know scouts develop. That's weird that we let them develop in the first place and don't reset them every year.
But you're saying that in 4 years, Seoul's scout went from all Outstanding to all LEGENDARY? And Douglass Tagg regresses over 26 years?
Sigh. When do we make all budgets the exact same?
Why do we need everything to be the exact same? They are all great scouts. A little variance is fine.? Your post has seemingly nothing to do with my question
I’m not tracking this. All scouts are supposed to be the same, same as owners. I doubt budgets affect the scout ratings.I don't know WHAT makes them get better or worse- some combination of team success & budgets? If someone's scout turns to crap they should let me know, but I really don't care if a guy has only a 188/250 for scouting amateurs vs 193.
Why do we need everything to be the exact same? They are all great scouts. A little variance is fine.
Owners die and are replaced with new guys that have different personalities. They always have been. Was @OU11 keeping an eye out for new owners in the 2040s and equalizing their ratings? Same with scouts. As far as I know these guys have always evolved.
Huh, all the owners are supposed to have the same personalities. Yes, I think he equalized the ratings. I thought you were doing the same, so things don't get out of whack. @OU11 designed a league that was fair, but where budgets would scale when we won. I can't find specific posts in search on how it was set up because OU called GMs owners in the 2040s (hence the owner-manager shtick) and it's throwing off my search results.
GMs are Owners and Owners are GMs as it's always been. I did do everything that was necessary (at the time, game has changed a lot since then) to make it as level as possible so that winning and losing were the only real drivers to money. The only things that weren't specfically set were ticket prices and IIRC your scout started at a level below the highest and I'd let them evolve to be the highest level if they did so.
Were you going in and changing the owner ratings? If so, to what?
Can an O post all the current Owner ratings please?
If he was doing that it was after the fact and I didn't know about it. The news blurbs always say if the guy is charitable, an economizer, etc.
Can an O post all the current market sizes please?
I didn't know scouts develop. That's weird that we let them develop in the first place and don't reset them every year.
But you're saying that in 4 years, Seoul's scout went from all Outstanding to all LEGENDARY? And Douglass Tagg regresses over 26 years?
It seems perfectly fair that Douglass would regress and have lower ratings. The SIM knows that his hidden TALISMAN rating is so high that allowing him equal scouting ratings would be unfair and break the game.
Why does the man with no tools highly favor tools?